[161529] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Tue Mar 19 13:50:55 2013
In-Reply-To: <4E4286DD-92D1-4A50-BC31-4BE166D1BEB2@virtualized.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:50:43 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org Group" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:45 PM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There's nothing inherent in BGP that would not work with an
>> unconstrained growth of the routing table, right? You just need enough
>> bandwidth and interrupts to deal with updates.
>
> With enough thrust, pigs fly quite well. Landing can get messy though...
I was being serious... the current 'bgp unconstrained dies' problem
isn't such a problem if you have (today):
4-8 cores
16 gb ram
ssd
gigabit ethernet
or as you'd call this, your desktop computer... trying to do this on a
600mhz mips with 512mb ram is, clearly, a problem. put modern
hardware to work and it gets simpler. Yes, the above addresses
getting/sending 'rib' data, it doesn't address programming a FIB, but
rethinking the programming of the fib a bit could, I bet, even get us
to a palatable point for a longer while, in a relatively short period
of time.
-chris
